IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i23p12816-d695530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicted Impact of the Lockdown Measure in Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Greater Bangkok, Thailand, 2021

Author

Listed:
  • Sonvanee Uansri

    (International Health Policy Programme, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi 11000, Thailand)

  • Titiporn Tuangratananon

    (International Health Policy Programme, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi 11000, Thailand
    Bureau of Health Promotion, Department of Health, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi 11000, Thailand)

  • Mathudara Phaiyarom

    (International Health Policy Programme, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi 11000, Thailand)

  • Nattadhanai Rajatanavin

    (International Health Policy Programme, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi 11000, Thailand)

  • Rapeepong Suphanchaimat

    (International Health Policy Programme, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi 11000, Thailand
    Division of Epidemiology, Department of Disease Control, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi 11000, Thailand)

  • Warisara Jaruwanno

    (International Health Policy Programme, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi 11000, Thailand)

Abstract

In mid-2021, Thailand faced a fourth wave of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) predominantly fueled by the Delta and Alpha variants. The number of cases and deaths rose exponentially, alongside a sharp increase in hospitalizations and intubated patients. The Thai Government then implemented a lockdown to mitigate the outbreak magnitude and prevent cases from overwhelming the healthcare system. This study aimed to model the severity of the outbreak over the following months by different levels of lockdown effectiveness. Secondary analysis was performed on data primarily obtained from the Ministry of Health; the data were analyzed using both the deterministic compartmental model and the system dynamics model. The model was calibrated against the number of daily cases in Greater Bangkok during June–July 2021. We then assessed the outcomes (daily cases, daily deaths, and intubated patients) according to hypothetical lockdowns of varying effectiveness and duration. The findings revealed that lockdown measures could reduce and delay the peak of COVID-19 cases and deaths. A two-month lockdown with 60% effectiveness in the reduction in reproduction number caused the lowest number of cases, deaths, and intubated patients, with a peak about one-fifth of the size of a no-lockdown peak. The two-month lockdown policy also delayed the peak until after December, while in the context of a one-month lockdown, cases peaked during the end of September to early December (depending on the varying degrees of lockdown effectiveness in the reduction in reproduction number). In other words, the implementation of a lockdown policy did not mean the end of the outbreak, but it helped delay the peak. In this sense, implementing a lockdown helped to buy time for the healthcare system to recover and better prepare for any future outbreaks. We recommend further studies that explore the impact of lockdown measures at a sub-provincial level, and examine the impact of lockdowns on parameters not directly related to the spread of disease, such as quality of life and economic implications for individuals and society.

Suggested Citation

  • Sonvanee Uansri & Titiporn Tuangratananon & Mathudara Phaiyarom & Nattadhanai Rajatanavin & Rapeepong Suphanchaimat & Warisara Jaruwanno, 2021. "Predicted Impact of the Lockdown Measure in Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Greater Bangkok, Thailand, 2021," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12816-:d:695530
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12816/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12816/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mohammad Reza Davahli & Waldemar Karwowski & Redha Taiar, 2020. "A System Dynamics Simulation Applied to Healthcare: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-27, August.
    2. Ashraf, Badar Nadeem, 2020. "Economic impact of government interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: International evidence from financial markets," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sonvanee Uansri & Watinee Kunpeuk & Sataporn Julchoo & Pigunkaew Sinam & Mathudara Phaiyarom & Rapeepong Suphanchaimat, 2023. "Perceived Barriers of Accessing Healthcare among Migrant Workers in Thailand during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(10), pages 1-11, May.
    2. Weiwei Zhang & Shiyong Liu & Nathaniel Osgood & Hongli Zhu & Ying Qian & Peng Jia, 2023. "Using simulation modelling and systems science to help contain COVID‐19: A systematic review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 207-234, January.
    3. Jin-Young Won & Yu-Rim Lee & Myeong-Heum Cho & Yoon-Tae Kim & Bo-Young Heo, 2022. "Impact of Government Intervention in Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mahata, Ajit & Rai, Anish & Nurujjaman, Md. & Prakash, Om, 2021. "Modeling and analysis of the effect of COVID-19 on the stock price: V and L-shape recovery," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 574(C).
    2. Md. Mahmudul Alam & Haitian Wei & Abu N. M. Wahid, 2021. "COVID‐19 outbreak and sectoral performance of the Australian stock market: An event study analysis," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 482-495, September.
    3. Ponzoa, José M. & Gómez, Andrés & Mas, José M., 2023. "EU27 and USA institutions in the digital ecosystem: Proposal for a digital presence measurement index," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    4. Al-Maadid, Alanoud & Alhazbi, Saleh & Al-Thelaya, Khaled, 2022. "Using machine learning to analyze the impact of coronavirus pandemic news on the stock markets in GCC countries," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    5. Amin Jan & Mário Nuno Mata & Pia A. Albinsson & José Moleiro Martins & Rusni Bt Hassan & Pedro Neves Mata, 2021. "Alignment of Islamic Banking Sustainability Indicators with Sustainable Development Goals: Policy Recommendations for Addressing the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-38, March.
    6. Afees A. Salisu & Abdulsalam Abidemi Sikiru & Philip C. Omoke, 2023. "COVID-19 pandemic and financial innovations," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 3885-3904, August.
    7. Peng, Yi-Ting & Chang, Tsangyao & Ranjbar, Omid & Xiang, Feiyun, 2024. "Has the COVID-19 pandemic shock transmitted to the u.s. stock market: Evidence using bootstrap (A)symmetric fourier granger causality test in quantiles," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    8. Guerrero, David & Letrouit, Lucie & Pais-Montes, Carlos, 2022. "The container transport system during Covid-19: An analysis through the prism of complex networks," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 113-125.
    9. Narasingha Das & Partha Gangopadhyay, 2023. "Did weekly economic index and volatility index impact US food sales during the first year of the pandemic?," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-23, December.
    10. Toan Luu Duc Huynh & Duy Duong, 2022. "Government responses, democracy, and COVID-19 containment: a cross-country study," Economics and Business Letters, Oviedo University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 98-106.
    11. Anthony Fakhoury & Ali Fakih, 2023. "Government intervention and business response as determinants of business continuity amid COVID-19: the case of Jordan and Morocco," International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 17(2), pages 196-219.
    12. Richard Mawulawoe Ahadzie & Dan Daugaard & Moses Kangogo & Faisal Khan & Joaquin Vespignani, 2024. "COVID‐19, Mobility Restriction Policies and Stock Market Volatility: A Cross‐Country Empirical Study," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 43(2), pages 184-203, June.
    13. Deev, Oleg & Plíhal, Tomáš, 2022. "How to calm down the markets? The effects of COVID-19 economic policy responses on financial market uncertainty," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Ashraf, Badar Nadeem & Goodell, John W., 2022. "The impact of social cohesion on stock market resilience: Evidence from COVID-19," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    15. Tran, Phan Huy Hieu, 2021. "Does employee stock ownership program reduce a company’s stock volatility during the Covid-19 lockdown?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    16. Cevat Giray Aksoy & Jose Maria Barrero & Nicholas Bloom & Steven J. Davis & Mathias Dolls & Pablo Zarate, 2022. "Working from Home Around the World," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 53(2 (Fall)), pages 281-360.
    17. Herjuna Qobush Izzahdi & Ani Wilujeng Suryani, 2023. "COVID-19 Vaccination, Government Strict Policy and Capital Market Volatility: Evidence from ASEAN Countries," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 2, pages 117-135.
    18. Elgammal, Mohammed M. & Ahmed, Walid M.A. & Alshami, Abdullah, 2021. "Price and volatility spillovers between global equity, gold, and energy markets prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    19. Arielle Kaim & Tuvia Gering & Amiram Moshaiov & Bruria Adini, 2021. "Deciphering the COVID-19 Health Economic Dilemma (HED): A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.
    20. Bao Doan & Duc Hong Vo, 2022. "Does the market pressure increase during the Covid-19 in Vietnam? Evaluating the impacts from government responses," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 42(2), pages 388-399.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12816-:d:695530. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.